The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1887-03-23
J. IA. 2. WEsTBRooK,
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. !


Appeal from the Circuit Court of DeSoto
county. Hon. A. T. Roane, Judge.
Watson & Malone, for the appellants.
White & Witherspoon, for the ap-
pellee.
On April Z, 1880, DIR. ]. H. P. West
brook was duly appointed Health Off
Ger" of DeSoto county by the Governor,
and at the expiration of his two years
term was reappointed. At the July
term, 1880, of the board of supervisors,
the salary of the health officer was fixed
at fiftoe en- dollars per month. At the
July &C m, 1882, the board of supervi-
sors p ,sed an order fixing the salary of
the "Health Officer" at one dollar per
month. DIR. Westbrook served till Octo-
Der 80, 1882, when he resigned and
brought this action against the board of
supervisors for the amount of his salary
from April z, 1880, to July 1, 1882, at
fifteen dollars pc month, and for the
value of his services from July l, 1882,
to October 81, 1882, which he estimated
at fifteen dollars per month, less the
amount he had been paid. The amount
claimed by him on this basis was 800,
and the jury found for him in that sum.
The evidence showed that he had per-
formed the services in q satisfactory
manner, and that fifteen dollars per
month WIS reasonable price for the
services rendered, and there was testi-
my which tended to show that one
dollar per month was totally inadequate.
The board of supervisors appealed.
ARNOLD, j., delivered the opinion of
the Court.
BY section 100 of the Code, it was the
duty of appellants to fix the salary of the
chief health officer of their county.
What the salary should be, was a matter
within their discretion, provided they
did not exceed the maximum specified
in the statute, or place it SO low as to
virtually abolish the Office in the county
Within these limits, the salary should
have been fixed at what the services of
the officer were reasonably worth, and
on this basis, it might have been changed
from time to time, if deemed necessary
and proper. But the laws for the pro-
lection of the public health, under
which appellee was appointed, are of
general application, and cannot be multi
fed in any county, by the failure of the
board of supervisors to fix the salary of
the general health officer of the county
after he has been duly appointed, or by
their fixing it at a rate so far below the
maximum, that no competent physician
will a. cept the Office. If the operation
of the law is unsatisfactory in any
county, it must find relief in the mode
provided by the statute, or from the
Legislature The statute cannot be re-
peaied or abrogated, directly or indi-
reetly, by board of supervisors.
The jury accepted as true, the testi-
mony that one dollar per month was
not adequate compensation for the SER
vices rendered. and there was no effort |
to show neglect of duty or want of
qualification on the part of appellee, or |
that the services of competent physi- |
clan could have been secured for the |
reduced salary.
1t appears that the action of appel |
Ianls in reducing the salary of the chief |
health officer of their county. from if
teen dollars to one dollar per month,
was intended to dispense with the Office
in that county altogether, and that prac-
tically it was an custer by indireetion
of appellee from the Office which had
been created, and to which he had been
appointed by an authority higher than
the board of supervisors Such action
was nullity, and the salary previously
fixed by the board was not thereby |
changed. On the facts of record the
result reached in the court below was
right and the judgment is affirmed.